Election 2012: Does Bishop Romney Have a Positive Message, or only a Negative Ad Campaign?

After the American Century

After a decisive victory in Illinois, Romney appears close to winning the Republican nomination. Notably, Gingrich's candidacy faded to fourth place, just behind Ron Paul. This leaves Santorum as his only real challenger, and Romney beat him by more than 10 percentage points. 

One can spin this somewhat differently, and point out that Romney still did not manage to get half the votes in Illinois. This means that despite outspending all of his rivals -- by a wide margin -- the Republicans as a group gave more votes to others than they did to him. There clearly remains a high level of dissatisfaction with him as a candidate.

But the mathematics of delegate counts suggests that after winning Puerto Rico and Illinois, he will be hard to stop. In terms of pledged delegates, Bishop Romney has more votes than his three rivals combined. 

(In case anyone wonders why I refer to him as Bishop, it is because Romney is a Bishop in the Mormon Church, and gives 10% of his income each year to it. This tithe, as well as his missionary work in France for the Mormon Church, shows that he is not a casual member of that church. He has also participated in posthumous baptism, a Mormon ritual  in which people who were never Mormons during their lives are "converted" post-facto. Among these are many of the founding fathers of the US and Anne Frank, who as a Jewish person was killed by the Nazis.)

The problem, increasingly for Bishop Romney will be one of turning his almost entirely negative campaign into a more positive one telling Americans how he can make the country a better place. To date, he has used all his energy to attack others, including the President. His advertising money has been overwhelmingly used to send out negative messages. By one count he has had seven negative advertisements for every positve one. It seems doubtful that this strategy alone will put him in the White House. 

So as Romney moves to later primaries, it will be interesting to see if he has anything equivalent to Ronald Reagan's famous "Morning in America" campaign. What is he for? This is also a challenge for the Republican Party as a whole, which for four years has been a negative force, constantly on the attack, but almost never offering anything new or innovative as a solution to the nation's challenges.

In short, the question now becomes whether Bishop Romney's candidacy can renew the Republican Party, or whether it will remain mired in squabbles between its various factions. Can it articulate a common vision and look forward? Can the Republicans think positively? And will Bishop Romney's religion play a role in whatever does happen?

Election 2012: What Do Alabama Exit Polls Tell Us about the Republicans?

After the American Century

No one really "won" in Alabama. Rather, three candidates split the vote into almost equal segments, with Ron Paul getting only 5 percent. But exit polls also tell us more about how the electorate is divided. Alabama is more interesting than Mississippi here, because the latter is so rural and so poor that it is an extreme case.

So, here are the conclusions one can draw from exit polls. First of all, there are virtually no Black people in the Alabama version of the Republican Party, being less than 2% of the primary voters there, or about 4,000 people. Perhaps these are Black Mormons or Black millionaires? No less than 93% of the Republican voters were white, and of the three main candidates Romney finished last with just 28%.

In terms of gender, Gingrich is the most popular among men (34%), especially those who have never gone to college. Apparently, they are the most impressed by his repeated claims to be the smartest candidate. He was strongest in the suburbs, with 35% there, and fully 40% think he is the candidate best able to deal with an international crisis.  Otherwise, in most categories Gingrich comes in second or third.

Santorum is the most popular among women, especially working women, and he is also the most popular among college graduates. (Remember that college in Alabama is often primarily about football.)  Santorum is also the most popular among younger voters, especially those under 30, where he got 41% of the votes. Apparently his intense moralism appeals to them, as well as to that half the Alabama Republicans who think a candidate's religious beliefs matter a great deal, 48% of whom voted for him. He was the most popular candidate in both rural and urban (but not suburban) Alabama. However, even his supporters think he is the least well prepared to deal with an international crisis.

Romney is not particularly liked by the intensely religious, the rural, the young, men, or women.  The only groups where his attraction rises to above 35% are those over 65 and those who make more than $100,000 a year. The logic seems to be that Romney would win a massive victory among rich, dead people, as, like him, they do not drink and are pretty rigid.  This constituency has little gender left and are almost all over 65. Given Mormon theology, in which the dead can be posthumously made a member of the church, this would seem an incontrovertible result. 

Romney also got 35% of the voters who had studied beyond the BA level. He is clearly understood, even by the Republicans, to be aloof from  ordinary people. Only one in five voters thought Romney best understood the average American's problems. Why is he getting about a third of the support, then? Two factors keep Romney viable in this race. (1) Not less than 59% of the Republican voters perceive the economy as the most important issue (compared to 25% who think it is the federal budget deficit, the 9% who think abortion is, or the 3% who say it is illegal immigration). Romney is generally thought to be the man who can deal with the economy.  (2) Romney is also perceived as the man who can most likely defeat Obama.

There are some curiosities that may not apply elsewhere. For example, it seems surprising that Romney only polled 28% among the Independent voters,  while 33% of them voted for Santorum. To be an "Independent" in Alabama apparently often means that one is further to the Right than the Republican Party, as Ron Paul did twice as well with them (11%) as he did overall. Overall, in Alabama 72% of the Independent voters voted for Gingrich, Santorum, and Paul. This is in contrast to most of the nation, where Independents tend to be moderate, centrist voters.

37% of the Alabama voters made up their minds in the last days before the election, and Romney narrowly won among this thoughtful group who realized that the choice was difficult because quality is missing. In contrast, Santorum won among those who made up their minds during the last few weeks (when he began to surge), while Gingrich won among those who decided long ago. In other words, Romney's heavy spending and massive negative advertising did sway some of the undecided voters during the last days of the campaign. Nevertheless, as predicted several days ago, he was never going to do well in these Southern primaries. 

Election 2012: Super Tuesday Probably Will Not Settle the Normination

After the American Century

Once upon a time there were real party conventions, where the nomination was not a coronation that had been scripted in detail for television. There was, for example, the magnificent competition between seven Democrats for the 1960 nomination, which was not settled on the first ballot, as usually happens today. John F. Kennedy emerged as the candidate then. Almost as exciting have been the wide open primary battles, like that in 1992, when the at first unlikely Bill Clinton emerged as the candidate.

The question to be answered tomorrow is whether we might be in for a wide open convention, or whether the nomination is more likely to be wrapped up sooner. Super Tuesday, with its many simultaneous elections, is at the least intended to narrow down the field. In short, will Gingrich or Paul decide later in the week that they should step aside? Or will all four candidates continue to battle for delegates?

Right now, Santorum and Romney are in a dead heat in the all-important Ohio Primary. Each has almost exactly one third of the votes, with the other third divided between Gingrich and Paul. Romney and Santorum are also running neck and neck in Tennessee.  Santorum is further ahead in North Carolina, but I have not seen enough polls for that state yet.

In contrast, some states are walkovers. Santorum seems certain to win by a wide margin in Oklahoma. Gingrich seems certain to win his home state of Georgia, with none of the other candidates coming within 20 points of his c. 44%.  Romney seems equally certain to run away with a victory in Massachusetts, his home state. Romney will also win Virginia in a walk because neither Gingrich nor Santorum  got on the ballot.

There are other states involved too, but the pattern seems clear. Right now it looks as though both Romney and Santorum will win some states, while Gingrich will only take Georgia. Ron Paul will not win any states at all, but he will pick up some delegates nevertheless. When the dust settles on Wednesday morning, it seems unlikely that Romney will suddenly be in a commanding position, though he will probably remain in the lead in terms of convention delegates.

If something like this is the result, then Super Tuesday will not decide anything. Romney will remain determined to grind down his opponents through superior organization and negative advertising. It has defeated all the challengers so far.  Santorum can say, "Well, of course Romney won his home state, and he won Virginia, where I was not on the ballot, but take that away and we ran about even." And Gingrich can say to himself, "Let Romney and Santorum keep hammering each other, and I will emerge as the least bloodied, most experienced candidate." And Paul? He does not seem to be in this contest to win it, but to have influence at the Convention. The less decisive Tuesday is, the better for him.

It looks like Romney will have to slug it out with Santorum for quite a while yet, and the longer it takes, the less excited the Republicans are likely to be about either of them, or about their chances in the fall. (Unless, of course, they become more civil and centrist, an unlikely development.) 

George Will, the usually level-headed and reasonable conservative columnist has already given up on the possibility of retaking the White House. He has just put out a column saying that the Republicans should focus on winning seats in Congress, instead.

Election 2012: Santorum On Top in Early Feb Polls

After the American Century

Since Santorum's triple victory last week a number of polls have shown his support rocketing up to the top position. In an average of all the recent polls, he has just over 30%, and he is about 3% ahead of Romney. Moreover, Santorum wins ALL of the polls, whether conducted by Pew Research or the New York Times. Just eight days ago this result would have seemed improbable.

Meanwhile Gingrich seems to have had his moment in the sun, falling in the same polls to about 16%. Moreover, the trend is downward, as he gets only 10% in the most recent one. Since Gingrich is nearly broke, he has had to stop most campaigning to raise money.  He vows to keep going, and almost certainly will be using his energies to attack Romney, though he is an unpredictable man.

Romney hardly needs to worry about money, but suddenly neither does Santorum. He received more than $1 million a day in the first days after his stunning victories last week. Moreover, suddenly all the journalists and TV stations want to talk with him. This gives him free exposure to the public.

And just to make it harder for anyone to achieve a majority, Ron Paul keeps chugging along. He came in a close second to Romney in Maine. Romney should have been able to win easily there, as Maine was once a part of Massachusetts and has many similarities with next door New Hampshire, where Romney won.

In short, things remain unstable and will be interesting at least until March 6, or Super Tuesday. Here is the schedule of the primaries and caucuses to come until March 6.  The full list stretches into June, and it is possible to imagine a scenario in which no one candidate has been chosen prior to the Republican Convention. That would make the Convention an exciting event, rather than a scripted coronation.

February
21: Wisconsin Primary
28: Arizona Primary
      Michigan Primary

March 

3: Washington caucuses

6: Alaska caucuses
Georgia Primary
Idaho caucuses
Massachusetts Primary
North Dakota caucuses
Ohio Primary
Oklahoma Primary
Tennessee Primary
Vermont Primary
Virginia Primary

Election 2012: The Long Game

After the American Century

So Romney has won Florida just as convincingly as Gingrich won South Carolina. But the race is not over. Far from it, for to win the nomination requires more than 1000 delegates, and Romeny has less than 100. Nevertheless, Romeny does have more money than his three rivals combined, and he has a strong organization up and running in each state. He was able to outspend Gingrich 5 to 1 in attack advertising, and Gingrich now has used up most of the millions he got from a Las Vegas casino owner and his wife. He claims to be a grassroots candidate, but so far the grassroots have not been sending in much money.

But Gingrich does have support in the Old South. He won in the Florida panhandle, which is the most southern part of that state, culturally speaking, precisely because it is the most northern part of the state, settled and developed by slaveholding families who joined in the Civil War. And Gingrich also can expect to do well in the primaries and caucuses of other southern states, such as his own Georgia, Alabama, etc. If he can also do well in the Mountain West, then Romney will have to outlast him.

For Gingrich the best scenario would be that Santorum soon drops out, due to lack of money and failure to do well since Iowa. His supporters would likely move to Gingrich, even if some of them might have to hold their noses to do so. On the other hand, Santorum may feel it is worth remaining in the race a while longer. He is not working at anything else, having lost his seat in the Senate, and by running he keeps himself before the nation, perhaps as a potential VP nominee. He may think that there is the possibility that Romney and Gingrich will discredit each other and Santorum can emerge as the alternative. 

And there is a big problem with Romney, from the point of view of a general election. The list of who gave money to his enormous PAC fund is now available for public scrutiny. It turns out the overwhelming majority of his backers are money men, investors, hedge-fund executives, and the like. Speculators. The very people who profited from the collapse of the economy. Americans are not exactly in love with bankers and hedge-funds at the moment. Not only did Romney run one of them, but people of this kind provide almost all of his campaign money. Many of them gave $1 million each. Expect Gingrich to remind the electorate. Often.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul keeps chugging along, with his 15% or so, which could become a factor at the National Convention. Imagine a scenario where neither Gringrich nor Romney has enough delegates, and they have to offer something to Paul to get his votes behind them on a second or third ballot. 

In short, this contest has the potential to last into the summer, especially if Gingrich can raise some money. The month of February is somewhat quieter than January, with just caucuses, and the focus shifts now to the longer game, with the first big test coming on Super Tuesday in March. Romney's money could be quite telling, as he will be able to saturate the airwaves of all the states with negative advertising, as he did in Florida. The many simultaneous primaries could be a decisive turning point. But then again, it might prolong the Republican agony and keep entertaining us until summer.

Election 2012: The Second Florida Debate

After the American Century

The second Florida debate is over, and it appears that Romney is suddenly a stronger debater. He has a new coach, and he was far more aggressive and convincing than before. Based on the debate alone, Romney seemed more credible and competent. Indeed, at several points he wiped the floor with Gingrich.

Based on this performance, many of the pundits now think that Newt may not be able to win in Florida. Moreover, new polls suggest that Obama would thrash Gingrich by almost 20 points. Many leading Republicans have said that he would not be the right man. The momentum seems to have shifted, in short.  Yet one of the most recent national polls does show Gingrich leading Romney 31 to 27%. And think about this. When either Paul or Santorum drops out, their voters are more likely to shift over to Gingrich than to Romney.

What about those two other candidates? Both Santorum and Paul had a good night. So long as they are in the race no one will be able to amass a majority of the Republican delegates to the convention. So much has happened already, that we cannot assume that the selection process is soon going to be over.

Meanwhile, the Republican candidates speak, with no sense of irony, of "self deportation" as a solution to the illegal immigrant problem. Newt Gingrich wants English to be "the official language of government" as if it were not already rather the case.  There was an absurd discussion about deporting illegal grandmothers. They speak so seriously and their audience of true Republican believers is so enthusiastic, one can forget that much of what is being discussed is nonsense.

Let the fun continue, just do not take them too seriously.

Election 2012: Obama's Popularity Surges After State of the Union

After the American Century

President Obama gave a crucial "state of the union" message last night, and hit a home run. His approval ratings have shot up to an unbelievable level, with 91% of Americans saying they approved his proposals for helping the economy.  He looks ready to tell a more populist story than before, and it seems to be working. It was a powerful speech, and if you have not seen it, have a listen. If you want a quick summary, as one pundit put it, "Due to my policies, Bin Laden is dead, and GM is alive."

Meanwhile, the Republicans have a problem. Their Mitt Romney had to confess that he makes $57,000 every single day, more than $20 million a year. This was according to the tax returns that he was forced to release by popular demand. He would have had to reveal his income if he became the candidate, but he ended up releasing the information the day that Obama was criticizing the rich for being irresponsible and avoiding paying their fair share of the taxes.

So where is Romney's money and how is it that he pays less than 14% in federal tax, about half the rate for the average American? It turns out Romney has some millions in tax havens, like the Caymen Islands, and in Swiss bank accounts. He is also the beneficiary of low tax rates on capital gains (from sale of stocks) - low rates put in place by the Republicans, of course. It appears that there is nothing actually illegal in the Romney tax records, but they are rather alarming. One begins to understand why he could offer to bet Rick Perry $10,000 about who was right on a particular issue. Ten grand is what Romney makes every six hours, even when sleeping, for not working.

The only problem Obama has now is that Romney may fold. Gingrich is running well ahead in national Republican polls, and slightly ahead or even in Florida, depending on the poll.  So Romney is being attacked by both the right in his party and by the Democrats. Obama is betting that Gingrich would be easier to beat, and that it therefore is better to hammer Romney out of the way, leaving the President as the only one on the center ground.

The election will be decided by the moderates in each party and by the Independents, and all the indicators are that Obama is winning them over.Gingrich, by comparison, is much further to the right and bragging about it. One begins to sense doom for the Republicans now, unless they find an entirely new candidate at the last minute, which is very hard to do given the primary system.

Election 2012: Wealthy Republican Candidates: One Angry, One Cold

After the American Century

South Carolina is voting as I write, and all the polls suggest that Gingrich is likely to win, or to come close to winning. A sampling of polls suggests that Gingrich might win by 4%, but the margin of error and the volatility of the public makes this prediction a bit dubious. The momentum is on Gingrich's side, as he has come from a deficit of more than 10 percentage points to take the lead. Romney will not be able to capture the nomination easily. 

The coming vote in Florida will test the Republican Party further. Romney and Gingrich do not just represent different political views. There is considerable animosity between them, and it is fueled by a barrage of negative advertising, from both sides. The longer the campaign lasts, the more divided the Republicans will become, and the fault lines are not merely between Gingrich and Romney  The Ron Paul stalwarts show no sign of losing enthusiasm for their man, who keeps alive a libertarianism that can never really compromise with Romney and has contempt for Gingrich's opportunism. That leaves Santorum to gather up the votes of conservative Catholics and evangelicals. They find Gingrich immoral, and they see Romney as unacceptable, for he is a Mormon who has supported abortion in the past.

In the previous post I predicted that South Carolina would be a bloodbath of negative advertising, and so it has been. Possibly in the coming Florida primary the Republican leadership will be able to convince the candidates to tone down their rhetoric, in the interest of eventual unity in the general election. However, my guess is that the vituperation and nastiness will continue. Romney has begun to attack Gingrich for his ethics violations that cost him leadership in the House of Representatives back in the 1990s. Until now little had been said about this. And Gingrich continues to hound Romney about his off-shore wealth, his low tax rate, and his still undisclosed personal finances. John McCain was successfully attacked for having so many houses that he could not recall how many, and Romney will be in for similar problems. 

It is not a sin to be rich in the United States, but it is unwise to run for public office if the wealth is not mitigated by well-publicized philanthropy or pro bono work for good causes. The rich man who is a public benefactor, like Andrew Carnegie or Bill Gates, is the cultural ideal. Angry or cold rich men who do not give something back are not popular. Men of great wealth have often created foundations to redistribute it, notably the Ford Foundation or the Rockefeller Foundation.  These charitable institutions have the added advantage that the contributions to them are tax deductions. Ted Turner gave much of his personal fortune to the United Nations, and Warren Buffet has put billions of dollars into the foundation that Bill Gates created with his billions. Such acts seem rooted in a Protestant idea of stewardship.

It may be that Romney has been beneficent, but if so, the news has not reached this writer or most of the electorate. He seems to be a ruthless capitalist, a Bain Buccaneer, who recently declared that he likes to fire people. Gingrich also seems devoted to feathering his own nest, and last year at times seemed to campaign in order to promote his books more than to win. He has accepted outrageous "consultation fees" from clients, when it is obvious that in fact he was peddling his considerable political influence.

None of these men seems a worthy steward of the nation's resources, much less a repository for the public trust. Santorum is not worth commenting on, and Ron Paul is too extreme to be taken seriously. Republican voters are left with two wealthy, self-serving, nasty candidates, neither of whom are trustworthy, consistent in their views, compassionate in their nature, or visionary in their politics. When the dust finally settles and we have a Republican nominee, one can only hope that by some miracle a new face has suddenly emerged. A nation of 300,000,000 people surely ought to be able to produce at least one decent Republican candidate. In hard times, a wealthy candidate can be appealing. Think of Franklin Roosevelt. Instead, we have two insensitive rich men, one angry, one cold.

Election 2012: Republicans Want a Generic Candidateto Beat Obama

After the American Century

The Republican candidates are busy beating each other up in South Carolina. A survey of all the polls shows that not one of them currently would beat  Obama. The President beats Romney by c. 2%, Paul by c. 6.5%, Gingrich by 8.5%, Santorum by 7.3%, and Perry by more than 11%.  The insanity/stupidly quotient is the same today as it was in 2008, by which I mean that almost 40% of the eligible voters appear ready to vote for an attractive idiot. In 2008 it was Palin, today it is Perry.

Curiously, an imaginary "generic Republican" would have a chance of tying or beating Obama. This is because when you ask voters to think of a generic Republican, they conjure up in their minds a figure who magically unites the party, without specifying a program. A Mr. Generic would presumably be a well-spoken man, with a good speaking voice and a ready smile, a clone of Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Generic does not exist, however, and the reality is that the Republican Party is deeply split between Tea Party activists, evangelicals, Wall Street special interests, and Ron Paul minimalists. Not only is there no person to unite around right now, but it is hard to see how anyone could be that person. The Republicans are in an ideological crisis and lack a focused identity. 

Perhaps in theory the disparate elements could make alliances and marriages of convenience in order to cobble together a common front. But instead, the candidates are becoming more vicious in their attacks. This became serious with Romney's attack ads against Gingrich in the Iowa contest, and now has gone far beyond what we have seen in previous contests.

Studies of negative advertisements suggest that their greatest effect is not one of persuading voters to change sides, but rather to destroy the motivation to vote at all. The idea is that only the base (i.e. the more extreme elements, whether to the right or left) will turn out on election day. That is the theory, but it seems headed another direction right now. Negative advertising has usually been seen largely in the general election, not the primaries. What happens when it becomes widespread inside one party? Surely the danger is that it will de-motivate them, destroying enthusiasm for the political process itself. 

Since the Republicans are numerically the smaller party to start out with, this spectacular display of disunity weakens their chances of standing together, much less persuading the all-important Independents to come over to their side. 

President Obama can sit back, say nothing, and enjoy watching this Republican self-destruction. But he should not get too comfortable, as his own job approval rating is only 45%

Election 2012: On to a Bloodbath in South Carolina

 After the American Century

Romney managed to get 39% of the votes in New Hampshire, a little less than expected but a decent showing. Ron Paul increased his percentage to almost 23%, however, and Huntsman showed that all his hard campaigning in the state paid off, with just shy of 17%. That left Gingrich and Santorum in a dead heat for fourth (and fifth) place with a bit over 9% each. The divided opposition favors Romney. Indeed, it would probably we worthwhile for him to pay some of these candidates to stay in the race, to prevent anyone from getting close to challenging him. What New Hampshire also sugggests is that these voters wanted moderates (Romney and Huntsman) who got 56% of the vote, while the more extreme candidates amassed only 44%.

Now that the New Hampshire results are in, we can look forward to glory combat in South Carolina. This is not going to be nearly so friendly to Romney as New Hampshire. Look for some hard-hitting campaign ads that focus on Romney, who will be attacked by all the other candidates, who are chasing him like a pack of hounds, and they getting more vicious the longer the hunt continues. This may be their last chance to bring him down. for if Romney wins all of the first three contests, the battle will really be over.

In particular, watch Newt Gingrich. He has received $5 million from a single donor, a rich Jewish casino owner from Las Vegas. He and Newt agree on Israel and the need to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions. He is reportedly an extremely wealthy man, so one wonders why he waited so long to make the giant contribution. Gingrich has been almost running on empty (in financial terms) for some time. He has also been running empty of new ideas, which is no problem given his opposition. Newt is preparing some strong attack ads that apparently will position him as the populist defender of the little guy against the ruthless and heartless Romney from Bain Capital. Romney was expecting such an attack, but in the fall, coming from the Democrats.

Instead, however, the attack has surfaced now, particularly in a 28 minute film, "When Mitt Romney Came to Town" which can be seen here:

http://www.webcasts.com/kingofbain/

Governor Perry has also bought lots of airtime, and he has been showing just what a good ole Southern boy he is, skipping the New Hampshire cold to cozy up to like-minded folks in the cradle of the Confederacy. South Carolina is still proud that it led some other states out of the union and into the Civil War. This is the sort of place where they kept flying the Confederate flag on courthouses until quite recently and were angry when pressured to take it down. In short, good Southern credentials are essential here, and Romney will never have them.

Nikki Haley, Governor of South Carolina, is only 39. She has endorsed Romney

Expect Romney to appeal to his core constituency, the bankers, who are think on the ground in Charleston and other cities, and the retirees from the North. who are baking on the beach at Hilton Head. Otherwise, he has the endorsement of Nikki Haley, the attractive young governor (above) who was elected with Tea Party support. At 39 and part Native American, she is breaks the stodgy Republican mould. He will have to leave the rural and small town voters to Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry.

Huntsman is reinvigorated after his strong finish in New Hampshire, but he will be out of his element. Being a Mormon from Utah who speaks Mandarin Chinese is not what South Carolinians are looking for in a politician. In many ways, he is but another version of Romney - rich Mormon, former Governor, non-Southern. Perhaps he should be dubbed "Romney-light." I think he is positioning himself for 2016, should the Republicans lose in 2012.

Ron Paul will presumably keep working the universities and colleges, which pays a double dividend, not only recruting voters but campaign workers as well. He should find South Carolina congenial. They will doubtless respect a doctor from Texas who wants to make the Federal Government weaker. That sounds like a Confederate policy position. However, Paul has had a problem attracting women voters so far, and this may be decisive if a close race develops.

Right now, however, Romney has the organization, and he certainly has the money, needed to roll over his opponents.  South Carolina is his crucial test of electability in the South. If he fails that test, then Republicans will rightly fear that he cannot beat President Obama, and the other candidates will have the chance to discredit him further in the Florida primary.

Election 2012: The Divided New Hampshire Republicans

After the American Century

All the polls say that Romney will win the New Hampshire primary, and some are silly enough to deduce that this is simply because he is local. But it is not so simple. Romney has 41% in an average of the polls taken (as of yesterday, Jan. 7), which sounds pretty good. But where are the other 60% of the voters?

I know New Hampshire chiefly through my father, who was born there and grew up on a farm there. He worked his way through the University of New Hampshire. Like his father, he remained a Republican all his life, the kind of Republican who is hard to find these days, though they still can be found in The Granite State. Romney appeals to such people. They are not much like the Bible Belt Republicans. They believe in small government, self-reliance, and hard work. They are not much for welfare, though generous to what they would call the truly disadvantaged., such as the blind, or to war veterans who lost a limb. They typically come from rural areas and smaller towns, often, like my Dad, from families that have been in North America since the seventeenth century. Compared to the rest of the Republican Party, these New Hampshire Republicans value education more. They do not talk like Gov Perry but like Gov Romney. They are less emotional, more rational.Some of them will be drawn to Ron Paul (currently about 20% in the polls) and others to Gov Huntsman (currently has c. 10% in the polls).

New Hampshire's Republican Party is more complex than that, of course. The State has a much lower tax rate than next door Massachusetts, and many people choose to live just over the line. They work in Massachusetts but live in New Hampshire. These are not factory workers, but upper middle-class people who have excellent jobs, often along Interstate 495 or on the old Route 128. They represent high-tech companies, and are technically savvy people, the sort who can easily identify with the Harvard educated Mitt Romney who played a leading role at Bain Capital.  Romney is especially strong with these voters, but some of them will likely go to Gingrich as well.

We can visualize these two constituencies by looking at a map and some charts, which come from The Wall Street Journal. The farmers and small town Republicans are further to the North. The majority of the state population, however, lives in Manchester and Nashua counties, along the southern  edge of the state. As one can see below, Romney's appeal in Iowa was weaker in 2012 than in 2008 everywhere except for the wealthy "burbs" - and fortunately for him, New Hampshire has many such voters in this southern tier.

These are the two key constituencies for Romney, but they are not the whole story. There are other kinds of Republicans in New Hampshire who are more like the Southern version of the party. 23% of the voters are Evangelical Christians who are suddenly flocking to hear Rick Santorum. There is also an energetic local Tea Party, that energized the Republicans to a stunning sweep in the last legislative elections. In addition, there are many conservative Catholics who will not support Romney because they focus on abortion, gay marriage, and other such issues. The Catholics are either of more recent immigrant background or they are French Canadians, who flocked into the state from Quebec after 1850 to work in the mills. These groups overlap, of course, as either an Evangelical or a Catholic might be a Tea Party activist. The big question going into this primary is whether Santorum can galvanize this constituency, and rise well above his current c. 10% in the polls. In theory, he could easily get double that and challenge Ron Paul for second place.

New Hampshire has no really large cities, but of course there are also urban-based Republicans, typically the small businessmen and lawyers. They are worried mostly about economic issues, and they also will likely support Romney, though some will go for Gingrich.

But the New Hampshire primary also has another factor that is hard to figure. Independent voters, i.e. those who are not registered with either of the parties, can and often do vote in the primary. This means that a large number of moderates will be casting their votes in New Hampshire, and this too tends to favor Romney and work against most of his opponents, with the exception of Huntsman, who is also a moderate.  In 2008 such voters seemed to have swung to Hillary Clinton in the last two days before the primary, which many mistakenly thought Obama would win. This time around the Independents might once again change the result. But will the Independents go for Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, or perhaps Huntsman? It is hard to tell, and thus all the more interesting to watch.

I worked in the New Hampshire primary for Senator Eugene McCarthy back in 1968. His central issue was opposition to the Vietnam War, and  he was running against Lyndon Johnson, a sitting president. McCarthy shocked the nation by winning over 42% of the vote.  Technically, he lost, but LBJ withdrew from the election not long afterwards.  By the same token, eveyone expects Romney to win big. He risks winning by too small a margin. Anything below 35% will be regarded as a poor showing.  Fortunately for him but unfortunately for the Republican Party, the opposition is divided, and none of them has even remotely the stature of Eugene McCarthy.

Election 2012: Who Really Won in Iowa?

After the American Century

The Iowa Caucus results are in, and Mitt Romney has eked out the narrowest victory in the history of these affairs. Beating Rick Santorum by a whisker, Romney had almost precisely the same vote total as he did in 2008. In other words, after spending millions of dollars and much time in Iowa, Romney was unable to improve on his second place finish of 2008, when he lost decisively to Mike Huckabee. 

Among Republicans, the real winner would seem to be Santorum, who until just a few weeks ago appeared to be an "also ran." [Later note: Santorum actually did win, the recount showed about a month later.] In national polls Santorum typically gets only 4%, but in Iowa he got 25%. Evangelicals rallied around him, even though he is a Catholic. Romney, in contrast, performed in Iowa precisely as he does in the national polls, getting 25% of the votes. He technically won, but no one could say that he achieved momentum. Fully three quarters of the Republicans wanted someone else.

One of these others was Ron Paul, who came in a strong third, with 21% of the vote. This was almost double his national polling numbers, and it suggests that he will continue to be a force in the primaries, particularly as they move toward his native South.  Paul attracts libertarians and small government enthusiasts, and represents the political (but not the religious) Right.

If it is hard to see which Republican really won anything in Iowa, it is easier to see who lost. Michelle Bachmann did poorly, garnering only 5%. Considering that she was born in Iowa and lives in neighboring Minnesota, if there was one place she might (once) have expected to win, Iowa was it. She never planned to run against Romney in his almost-home state of New Hampshire, and she has now withdrawn from the race.

Newt Gingrich was also a loser, as he fell to only 13% of the vote. In the middle of December Gingrich was the leading Republican candidate, with 35% in the national polls. In Iowa he got little more than a third as much support. He expects to do better in South Carolina. Perhaps he finds solace in the fact that McCain did poorly in Iowa in 2008 but still won the nomination.

Then there is Texas Governor, Rick Perry, whose beautiful hair thatches over a weak mind. He got only 10% of the vote. Back in September, when voters knew little about thim, he was briefly the leading candidate, with over 30% in the national polls. But he has embarassed himself so often that surely it is time for  Perry to go home and manicure his hair. However, he has decided to hang in the race at least through South Carolina.

Who then was the winner? Not the Republican Party, which is becoming a deeply split organization. The battle between its three disparate parts – evangelical, corporate, and libertarian – will now become even more intense and divisive. Not Mitt Romney. After four years of running for President, he did no better in Iowa than in 2008, and he has failed to generate any enthusiasm. 

The winner, though not on the ballot, was President Obama.

Election 2012. Obama vs. Romney?

After the American Century

While it is too soon be be certain, it looks like the 2012 election will be a contest between Romney and Obama. It might be that yet another Republican challenger will arise tomorrow, but time is running out for that scenario. Gingrich's star continues to fall. Ron Paul's is rising, but he is too far Right for most voters. Romney is what the GOP seems to have left, though it will likely take at least a month, more likely two months, to establish this for certain. So, what are the differences between these men?

Both Obama and Romney attended Harvard Law School and there are some similarities. But on the whole it stacks up as a clear choice between quite different kinds of men.

Similarities
Both men have long been married to the same women. (Note, however, that on Romney's father's side there were six polygamous men, with a total of 41 wives.) Both graduated near the top of their respective class at Harvard Law School. Both are more centrist than their parties, and both, therefore will have some problems igniting the energies of the more extreme elements of their "base". Both achieved considerable wealth early in life, more in the case of Romney. Both see themselves as outsiders in Washington.

Careers

Romney's father, George, was first an automobile executive in Michigan and a Republican governor in that state. He later ran unsuccessfully in Republican presidential primaries. Mitt has followed the same pattern, starting in business at Bain Capital, then moving to the statehouse, in his case as governor of Massachusetts. Like Obama he ran as an outsider in the 2008 primaries. He made himself better known, but early had to admit that he was not going to get the nomination. He threw his support to McCain. Romney has essentially remained a candidate for president throughout the first Obama term.

Obama did not have a father at home to imitate or to assist him. He achieved his way into one of the best universities and Harvard Law School, where he became editor of the law review. He could easily have gone into corprorate law and made a great deal of money. Instead, he worked as a community organizer in Chicago, taught law, and went tinto Illinois State politics. He also proved to be an excellent writer, with two best-selling books, which helped to propel him into the Senate and the White House.

Economic Theory

Romney, as his business background would suggest, wants to minimize regulation from the government and thinks private enterprise can solve most problems. He is Chicago School and wants to balance the budget. Romney also has a degree from Harvard Business School, and made a fortune working in the private sector. Obama, who taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, is more a Keynsian, and not nearly so wealthy. 

Abortion: Multiple Choice  vs.   Pro Choice

Romney was pro choice when running for governor in Massachusetts, but moved decisively to the right in recent years. Hehas mockingly been called the "multiple choice" candidate, because his views shift on issues. Obama has been consistently pro-choice.

Medical Care

Romney pushed a comprehensive law through the Massachusetts State House that created a health care system quite similar to that Obama and the Democrats created a few years later. However, Romney has consistently attacked the Obama program, again moving well to the right on this issue.

Religion

Romney's Mormanism is definitely a liability, it being more crucial to be mainstream Protestant for a Republican than for a Democratic candidate.

Foreign Policy

Romney sounds more agressive and hawkish than Obama, who has, however, continued many of Bush's foreign policies, not least in the Middle East. The differences are there, but the American public is focused on domestic issues, particularly the economy. The election will only be about foreign policy if there is a major crisis.

Charisma

Obama very much had it in 2008, but he is no longer the unquestioned darling of the Left, which has found him too much a centrist on many issues. But Obama remains a formidable speaker, with rhetorical gifts that Romney cannot match. Romney has never been accused of having charisma, quite the opposite. He fails not only to ignite the passions of the right-wing Republican base but also to excite moderates listening to his speeches. In one-on-one situations Romney can be stiff and uncompromising. He seems to lack empathy for people who are not like himself. Obama does better with small groups, in most cases.

Campaign Spending
Both men will spend lavishly on this election, which will almost certainly become an orgy of advertising, much of it funded by outside groups and corporations who are "independent" of the candidate they support. However, because so much money will be used, there may be a backlash against it, especially with unemployment over 8.5%.

Overall
If voters cannot decide between two candidates, they often ask themselves, "Which of these two would I rather have a couple of beers with?"  This will not be Romney's strong suit, and I think Obama gets an edge on that one. Otherwise, the race may well be decided by who has the more effective running-mate and by unexpected events. The polls right now suggest Obama would win by a small margin against Romney, and my sense is that this ex-governor Mormon businessman will not become more likable as voters see more of him. So much will happen between now and November, that it is too soon to predict a result, but if held today Obama would win the election, but narrowly.

Romney vs Perry: Republicans Display Their Divisions

After the American Century

The Republican presidential hopefuls have been stumping and debating for months, but I have not been commenting on them. Until now.  Two figures have emerged as front runners, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry have now emerged as the early front runners, and while this could easily change, an analysis is in order.

Romney is an old face.  Former governor of Massachusetts, where in passed a health care bill not so different from President Obama's, he came to politics from business, where he became financially independent. His family has long been identified with the Northern, more moderate wing of the Republican Party, and his father succeeded in being elected governor of Michigan, which is usually regarded as a more Democratic state. His father also ran for president several times. In short, Romney would be a strategically smart choice for the Republicans, because he would appeal to centrist and Northern voters, who will be essential to win the election. There is, however, the problem of Romeny's personality, or rather lack thereof. Romney is not a warm person. He can even come across as rather heartless at times. He is not a particularly stirring speaker. Add to this that the Southern Democrats (many of them former Republicans) do not like his "soft" stands on abortion and gay marriage. They are even less excited by the fact he is a Mormon. No one of htat faith has ever been elected president, and polls show Mormons are less electable than Catholics. In short, he may be the sensible centrist candidate for the Republicans, but he does not inspire them. There is no passion for Romney.

Texas governor Perry is a new face on the national scene, and in many ways is the mirror opposite of Romney. He generates more passion and many love him down in his native South, where he claims to be the small government candidate who creates jobs. He constantly attacks Washington, which has been a successful formula for candidates since the nineteenth century. (Obama also ran against Washington in 2008.) 

Perry would have had an excellent chance of winning the presidency of the Confederacy, if they had only won the Civil War. Indeed, Perry has hinted that succession from the union is still a viable option for Texas. On the other hand, he has a "soft" stand on immigration. For example, he allows children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition at Texas universities. If the children were born in the US, they are automatically citizens, so this is hardly a radical idea, though it upsets many Republicans. Michelle Bachmann typifies the hand-line stance on this issue, as she would put an fence “on every mile, on every yard, on every foot” of the border with Mexico. This is easy for her to say, because there are few Hispanic voters in Minnesota, where she gets elected. Perry faces the electoral reality that Hispanics are a force in Texas politics.

But on many hot-button issues Perry is closer to the Republican Southern base, notably abortion and gay marriage. Perry has also organized and led a prayer meeting where many of the other speakers sounded just plain crazy. One speaker at this giant meeting, held in a Houston stadium, declared that the Japanese economic downturn of the 1990s was the direct result of the Emperor of Japan having sex with a demon goddess. Another declared, in all seriousness, that Oprah Winfrey is the harbinger of the Anti-Christ! You will also learn that the Statue of Liberty is a "demonic idol" foisted on the US by French Freemasons. As a sensible reader, you surely think I am making this up, so here is the link, where you can see and hear for yourself. There you will hear so many odd, crackpot opinions, that it may seem that the entire deranged right-wing of America gathered to support Rick Perry in Houston. 

It is a measure of how far US politics have moved to the right that Perry can even be considered for the office of President. And it is also a measure of how much the political landscape has changed, that cold and colorless Romney begins to look rather good by comparison. They represent the two rather incompatible sides of the Republican Party,  On the one side the North, old money, reasonable language, and centrism; on the other side the South, revivalism, apocalyptic language, the Tea Party, and anti-state, anti-science, and anti-compromise rage.

However, just as Hillary Clinton led the field in the fall of 2007 but ultimately lost in the spring of 2008, these front runners could knock each other out, while a third candidate snatches the prize of nomination. Such a third candidate will not necessarily be better than Perry or Romney. 

It is not over yet. Indeed, it has hardly begun.

Can Joe Biden Help Obama Regain the Lead?

After the American Century

Obama has chosen Joe Biden, Senator from Delaware since 1972 as his running mate. Biden has long chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (when the Democrats had a majority in that chamber) and his extensive experience there shores up one of Obama's weak points. The choice underscores the historical fact that vice-presidents often are not selected based on their ability to deliver a particular state. Delaware is one of the smallest states in the nation, and with only three electoral votes is not an important prize in itself. More important is Biden's mix of experience, feisty energy, and extensive Washington connections that will make him an engaging contrast to Obama.

Biden can emphasize that he is a Catholic, born in the working-class town of Scranton, Pennsylvania. The over-riding question is whether he can inspire working-class voters who have been reluctant to support Obama. During the past month he has fallen in the polls against McCain, who might win a close election were it held today. The many polls tracked by RealClearPolitics collectively show that a month of negative campaigning led by Karl Rove trainees, has taken its toll on the Illinois senator. To some extent McCain has also risen in the polls, but a considerable number of voters, at least 15%, remain undecided. Negative campaigning has created some of that indecision.

In the last week Obama has begun to hit back, with his own negative advertisements. And so the downward spiral accelerates, propelling this campagin, like all others in recent memory, down the low road of attacking character rather than debating policies. McCain has accused Obama of being unpatriotic, inexperienced, and elitist, to make a short list. Obama is now replying that McCain is too wealthy and out of touch to understand the economy or the problems of ordinary Americans. The Arizona Senator provided grist for this mill when he could not tell a reporter how many houses he has. A man who is not certain how many houses he owns (seven) the argument goes, does not deserve to sit in the White House. Certainly, he is in a far different position than 99% of the public.

Obama has tried to keep to the high road in his national campaign advertisements, reserving the negative advertisements for particular state races. There is no need to parade negativity in places where he is comfortably ahead, like California or New York. If his strategy works, it will present him as an idealist who would rather not get down in the mud, but will fight there if that is the ground staked out by McCain's Rove-inspired campaign.

The danger with negative campaigning remains that in the end both candidates will only look bad to the voters. Perhaps the addition of Joe Biden will move Obama in another direction, quite familiar from previous races, where the vice-presidential nominee goes on the attack while the presidential candidate tries to stand above the fray.

Meanwhile, the press seems to agree that McCain has not yet decided on a running-mate, but that he is seriously considering three governors: Tom Pawlenty of Minnesota, Charlie Crist of Florida, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. Many other names have been discussed, however, perhaps the most interesting being Condolezza Rice - who could suddenly give him traction with both Black and women voters.

With the race a statistical dead-heat, the coming two weeks of conventions may prove crucial to the public's perception of both candidates, and to the result on election day.

Super Tuesday

After the American Century, voting statistics updated 11:30 PM

For the Republicans, McCain was the winner on Super Tuesday. For the Democrats, there was no victor, but the results suggest Obama may be a stronger candidate than Clinton.

On the Republican side, McCain won the most delegates, but he did not win a majority of the states. Huckabee won all the Southern primaries yesterday (Arkansas, Tennessee, Alabama and Georgia), and no doubt he would be president of the Confederacy, had the Union not won the Civil War. To the North, reports of Mitt Romney's political death seem to have been announced prematurely. He won a number of western states, not just Massachusetts and Mormon Utah. Bishop Romney also took Colorado and three states along the Canadian border, Montana, North Dakota, and Minnesota. With seven states in all, Romney kept himself in the race, especially considering that California, unlike most of the other Republican contests, is not a winner-take-all state.

Nevertheless, the Romney camp is a bit unhappy today, first because they know that McCain is far ahead in the only area that really matters: delegates. Second, because McCain and Huckabee ganged up on Romney in West Virginia in the caucus there. When the early ballot was inconclusive, McCain told his supporters to give their votes to Huckabee. Romney feels he got mugged. McCain won the four biggest prizes of the day, the populous states of California, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois. He also took Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Arizona,, Oklahoma and Missouri. It you plot the results on a map, Huckabee won the Old South, Romney the plains and Mountain West, and McCain the heavily populated more mainstream states in between.

In terms of delegates, it is too early to make a final count. CNN gives McCain about 680, putting him well ahead of Romney (270), Huckabee (176), and Paul (16). These figures (and those listed below for the Democrats) are still being revised as I write, and the final results will be somewhat different. However, the relative standing of the candidates will not change. McCain certainly looks like the winner, but even he has only about half the delegates needed. Huckabee and Romney insist that they are still in the race. Conceivably each of them hopes that McCain will not be able to sustain this campaign marathon. They would never say it directly, but a front-runner over 70 is vulnerable should any questions arise about his stamina, his heart, or any aspect of his physical condition. Huckabee makes a point of jogging in full view of the press, and Romney radiates good health. In short, McCain will probably win, but he needs to look vibrant and energetic. Apparently, he still has to fight for another month or so.

On the Democratic side, Obama can claim 14 states versus only 8 for Clinton. He can also point to impressive victories in states with virtually no African-American population: Alaska, Idaho, Minnesota, and North Dakota. Recall any African Americans in the film Fargo? A few weeks ago it would have seemed madness to think that a Black candidate could win in these places, but in each case he won by a landslide over Clinton. Obama received an astonishing 80% of the votes in Idaho, more than 70% in Alaska, and more than 60% in Minnesota and North Dakota. Obama also triumphed in Georgia and Alabama, receiving not just the Black vote but a sizable while vote as well, showing that the victory in neighboring South Carolina was no fluke. In Georgia, Obama had more than twice as many votes as Hillary. In addition to the South, Obama can claim victories in all parts of the nation, including New Mexico, Colorado, and Idaho in the West; Kansas, Illinois, and Missouri in the Midwestern heartland; and Connecticut and Delaware in the East. It was an impressive showing. His campaign staff did an excellent job in a complicated contest.

Hillary can also claim victory, even if she won fewer states, and even though she won them by smaller margins. She will get the most delegates because she took the two biggest prizes: her home state of New York and the most populous US state of all, California. Her two areas of strength were the Northeast and a clutch of states in the upper South, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, where Bill was governor. 

In terms of delegates, the precise results will not be worked out until 7 February at the earliest. But as of 5:30 PM (EST) on Wednesday, CNN estimates that Clinton has won 625 at the ballot box, plus 193 super delegates, and that Obama has won 624 delegates, plus 106 super delegates. There are still more than 100 delegates to be awarded, but the fact it is taking so long strongly suggests that they will be divided up pretty equally. Neither will be close to the 2025 needed to win the nomination. Note, too, that there are 75 uncommitted and some also remain formally committed to John Edwards. If the race stays tight, these votes, along with the other super delegates will become crucial.

Strategically, Obama's showing tells party professionals that he has the best chance to win against McCain in November. Hillary won states that the Democrats usually win, notably Massachusetts and New York. However, she showed little strength in the marginal states that must be won to beat the Republicans, such as New Mexico and Colorado. Bush and Cheney triumphed by carrying the South and West, and Obama poses a stronger challenge to the GOP in these areas than she does. The more analytical Democratic managers will read Super Tuesday as proof that Obama can threaten McCain in all areas of the nation, while Hillary is strongest in the areas of their traditional strength. If he is nominated, Obama can no doubt carry traditional Democratic strongholds such as California, New York, and Massachusetts, where Hillary won, but where he also did respectably. If Hillary is the nominee, however, she has less chance than he does of winning the swing states. That matters.

Obama challenges the Republicans in those swing states and even in places they long have taken for granted, like Alaska and Idaho. He has the potential to lead a landslide, fundamentally changing the contours of the Congress. In contrast, Clinton has the potential to win a hard fought, close contest. He is more likely to lead a fundamental change. She can bring a shift in power, but it would likely be a narrow triumph, bitterly won, that could only lead to more partisanship.

To see what such a close struggle might be like, no need to wait. Hillary and Obama will continue to battle for at least another month, probably more.

For an overview of future primaries, see Blog for 3 Feb.

Does the First Nominee Have the Advantage?

After the American Century

There is a myth floating around in conversations I have heard in the US, that the party which decides on its candidate first has a decisive advantage. In other words, the party that unifies first behind one candidate can then consolidates its troops, while the other side is still fighting amongst themselves. It seems plausible. If true, then the Republicans might have an advantage, because their primaries are often winner-take-all contests, like Florida, where Romney got 31% of the votes but no delegates.

In contrast, the Democrats divide up the delegates from a primary roughly in proportion to the votes each candidate received. I say roughly, because the division is made at the local level, and can lead to small anomalies. For example, Clinton got the most personal votes in Nevada, but Obama got one more delegate (13) than she did (12), because of the way the vote broke down in particular districts. In other words, McCain (or conceivably Romney) might assemble the needed delegates in the next few weeks much more quickly than Clinton or Obama can. The Democratic race could easily take several months after Super Tuesday. If it is really close, then the decision might be made in balloting at the Democratic national convention in the summer. In other words, possibly neither Hillary nor Obama will get a majority, even when the primaries are over. In that case, the delegates who are pledged to Edwards would become crucial. He could be the power broker, deciding who gets to be the nominee, in exchange for something he wants - such as being the Vice Presidential nominee (again).

With that sort of scenario a possibility, the myth of early consolidation sounds appealing, but it is simplistic. The myth may be true if a party's candidates broadly agree on policy and are only fighting for the right to be the nominee. But what if the candidates fundamentally disagree about policy, as they do in the Republican Party right now? McCain is the front-runner, but I have met people who are furious at him, for example because he has a liberal approach to immigration policy. One angry woman told me that all the illegal immigrants should be thrown out, that they should have gotten in line for a green card and not entered the country before then. In her view, and that of millions of other conservative Republicans, McCain is completely unacceptable on that point. They will not much feel like rallying behind him, even if he does sew up the nomination. The question asked on a CNN Poll today was, "Can McCain Bring the Republicans Together"? Three out of four did not think so. There are too many fundamental issues that divide them. In addition to immigration, they disagree on what for them are fundamental moral questions: the theory of evolution, abortion, and gay marriage. Nor do they agree on how to deal with Iraq. Ron Paul's vocal minority wants withdrawal, but McCain will stay as long as it takes. I do not expect to see Huckabee or Paul supporters put much energy into a McCain candidacy. Or, if the candidate is Romney, many McCain supporters will sit on their hands, because he is too conservative for them.

In short, either Romney, or more likely McCain, might get the nomination early, only to find that party support is lukewarm. Weak enthusiasm from the Republican base would not stand up well to either the Clinton machine or the Obama wave. Moreover, the media are not going to give as much attention to an already-selected Republican as they will to a dramatic battle between the two exciting candidates on the Democratic side. And note that Obama and Hillary do not have radically different policy statements. Supporters of either one could in good conscience go out and work for the other.

An interesting historical comparison makes the same point. In 1960, Richard Nixon was the clear, early front-runner and early got the Republican nomination. On the Democratic side a fierce battle for the nomination went all the way to the convention and was only decided on the third ballot. In other words, the Republicans had unified early and, according to the myth, should have won, because the Democrats were fighting each other all summer. Moreover, Nixon could claim far more experience than his younger but less well-known rival. The winner? Jack Kennedy, a charismatic candidate demanding change. His vice-presidentail running mate? Lyndon Johnson, a Southern Senator who had the delegates needed for a majority. It might be "deja-vu all over again."

Florida: Mac is (Still) Back

After the American Century


The results are in, and McCain has won Florida with 36%, with Romney at 31%. It seems that McCain has found what Ponce de Leon was looking for: rejuvenation. He was the Spaniard who discovered Florida, looking for the the fountain of youth, which he had heard lay in that region. McCain may be the oldest candidate, but he's looking a bit younger after winning Florida. Giuliani, in contrast, found out that he is old news. Finishing third, the press is reporting that he will drop out of the race and endorse McCain. That means the Republican moderates will no longer be split, while Huckabee and Romney will continue to divide the more conservative Republicans.

The state where the Republican field was reduced to three is not like the rest of the South. Almost exactly 400 years after Ponce de Leon's futile search, old people from the Northern US began to retire to the warmth of Florida, which has had a land boom and bust cycle for 90 years. This influx of Northerners, many from New York City, makes the State less "southern" on the political map than it appears to be geographically. If the rest of the South is reliably conservative in Presidential elections, Florida is not. There are acres of retired Jewish voters on the beaches near Miami, who tend to go for McCain. There is the large Cuban community, still fighting the Cold War against Castro. They also voted on the whole for McCain. Then there is the large gay community on the chain of islands leading down to Key West. Some of them are conservative enough to vote Republican, but they will not like Huckabee, who wants a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage, or Romney, who is almost as hostile.

Huckabee gave up on Florida, and he got only 13% of the vote. Perhaps he hoped that Romney could beat McCain if he were not there to divide the vote. Meanwhile, Giuliani put all his eggs in the Florida basket, but has now proven the pundits were right: campaigning only in one state was a bad strategy, though it gave him a chance to work on his tan. All the polls indicate that in the last days before balloting, it became a two day race, and now we have the results.

Florida is diverse enough to resemble the nation as a whole, certainly more so than South Carolina. So it is important who wins there, not just for the delegates to the convention, but because the Republicans usually need to win this state to win the Presidency. That was obviously true in 2000 (though they may not have really won), and it was also the case in 2004. If they lose Florida (as they did 1996), then they likely will lose the general election. It is the biggest swing state.

The Republican Party contenders, like Ponce de Leon, have been looking for rejuvenation in Florida. The explorer not only failed but soon died. The same has now happened to Giuliani, and perhaps Huckabee. Now the questions are: Will the battle between Romney and McCain get nasty? Will Huckabee drop out in time to help Romney, creating a political debt? Can McCain win over the conservative wing of the party, many of whom still publicly say they do not want him? We will get an idea in six days, on Super Tuesday.

Republicans Struggle to Find a Candidate

Here in Boston, where I had my hair cut this morning, Mitt Romney does not seem popular. He once was governor of the state, and he also ran the Olympics, and normally such things make one respected. But my barber assured me that Romney was "a two-faced liar" who told every audience whatever they wanted to hear, and who did not stand for anything. This was the most direct expression of what many others also have said to me. Furthermore, rumors float about that some Democrats dislike Romney so much that they have changed their voter registration to "Independent." This will give them the right to vote in the Republican primary in Massachusetts - voting against Romney in his home state. In other words, they want to embarrass him. It may be that few people are actually going to do this, but the rumor itself suggests an unusually active dislike.

Nevertheless, on the national scene, Romney has begun to look like McCain's most serious Republican rival. Fred Thompson has dropped out of the campaign, and Huckabee is so short of money that he cannot afford to give journalists free transportation. He has decided to cut back his appearances in Florida and concentrate on more evangelical places, notably Georgia, where polls put him in first place. Still, cutting back on travel for the press is one of the last things any contender will do, because the press are vital to keeping your name and opinions before the public. In Florida's primary, coming up on Saturday, that leaves McCain and Romney as the main contenders, which Giuliani a potential spoiler. At the moment Romney is leading in the Rasmussen polls, with 27%. McCain is close behind at 23%, and the former Mayor of New York at 20%. [Update Friday 25th: since writing this I have seen several other polls that put McCain slightly ahead, but the margin of error is 5%, which means they are in a tie. But these polls also show Giuliani falling back to about 15%, in a tie with Huckabee.] Since Giuliani has spent far more time and money in Florida than the other two men combined, he seems to be fading out of the race. But note that slightly more than one third of the Republicans say they have not entirely made up their minds yet. In other words, "undecided" is winning just at the moment.

And what the Republicans cannot decide upon is not just which candidate to support, but what policies they stand for. Each of these men stands for something quite different. McCain comes from a military family, in which four generations have now gone to the Naval Academy. He is a maverick on social issues, and does not appeal to the Huckabee backers. The religious Right only likes Huckabee, in fact, as Giuliani has been married too many times and does not get angry about abortion or praise Jesus. Worse yet is Romney, whom the largely Southern Evangelicals do not like because he is a Mormon and in any case a Northerner. So this numerically important, if intellectually stunted fundamentalist rump of the Republican Party is in a crisis. There is even talk of running a third party candidate if an unacceptable candidate wins the nomination. For more sensible Republicans, Romney represents the business wing of the party, the employer class. Before serving as governor he was a successful capitalist.

For those readers who know their Protestant theology, the differences between these candidates can be explained in the theological terms. Ever since European Protestants came to the New World, they have struggled with two incompatible ideas about how one achieves salvation: the doctrine of grace vs. the doctrine of works. Huckabee is all about grace, the word of God, and the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit. There are millions of people in the United States who believe in the reality of Angels, who refuse to accept the theory of evolution, and who see nothing wrong with "speaking in tongues" in a church service. Huckabee is their man, and he represents the idea that the only way to salvation is through grace raining down on the unworhty sinner. Romney may be a Mormon, but his career is all about hard work and achievement, or the doctrine of works. A man earns his way into heaven. By prospering in this world he shows that he will be one of "the elect" in the next world. Ever since the seventeenth century, Protestants have disagreed about whether grace or works is the correct doctrine. Churches have broken into warring sects over these matters.

For those immersed in the doctrine of grace, Giuliani, with his Italian background, is the worst thing imaginable. For he is a very secular man. He is not just a Catholic, which for several hundred years was thought a terrible thing. He appears to be something even worse, he is a lapsed Catholic, with three divorces and liberal positions on abortion and other family value issues. A man like that, to the religious right is Godless, liberal, and clearly untrustworthy.

McCain is another matter, representing the warrior class. A potential slayer of infidels and defender of the American faith, he is more acceptable to the religious right in the sense that he stands for some moral absolutes. They respect that. But McCain has also been a maverick on social issues. He too seems secular, certainly neither a Creationist nor Bible-thumper. So the religious right is uncomfortable with all the candidates except Huckabee. However, the non-evangelical Republicans, the ones who went to real universities, gag when they hear Huckabee pontificate.

To sum it up, not only is the Republican Party struggling to find a candidate, it is struggling with its own identity. Bush could win over Evangelicals with a bit of coded rhetoric now and again - which was also the old Reagan tactic. Both gave fundamentalists the sense that their values were honored in the White House. Reagan and Bush II were mostly rhetoric, however, and they did not use too much political capital actually trying to stop the spread of gay marriage, prevent the teaching of evolution, or get prayer back into the classroom. It seems that neither Romney nor McCain nor Giuliani will play that game. The Reagan coalition seems to be dead.

Yet politics makes strange bedfellows. What if Huckabee became the vice-presidential nominee? Surely not Giuliani and Huckabee. But Romney and Huckabee? McCain and Huckabee? Then the Evangelicals would rejoice in their temples, gird up their loins, and march out on the campaign trail to do the Lord's work. It is a frightening prospect.

The Michigan Results

Romney has won in Michigan, with 39% of the votes, and so he keeps his hopes alive. McCain had 30%, Huckabee only 16%. It was a convincing victory. Romney was the strongest candidate in all age groups except for those over 60, who went for McCain. Romney also beat Huckabee among both Protestants and Catholics. Meanwhile, McCain carried the Republicans who never go to church, with 39% of that little constituency. Furthermore, as noted in an earlier blog here, Huckabee did extremely poorly among the Catholics, getting less than 10% of their votes. And these are the very conservative, Republican Catholics, who represented about 30% of the vote. Huckabee would have even less appeal to the larger group of Democratic Catholics. In short, Michigan's results suggest that Huckabee may have been a one-win wonder in Iowa, who now must redeem himself in South Carolina next week, if he is to look viable. 

McCain, on the other hand, did respectably in Michigan, which after all is Romney's former home state. It is hard to beat an opponent who can bring his old schoolteacher and classmates up on stage. Nevertheless, if we probe these results further, it turns out that voters who think the economy is on the right track and who are generally satisfied voted for Romney. The unhappy voters were more likely to be for McCain, whether they were upset by Bush in particular, the poor Iraq results, or the economy.  McCain also was relatively successful with Independents and Democrats, some of whom crossed over to vote for him. Finally, McCain defeated Romney in urban areas (40% to 31%), which is obviously important in the coming contests for New York and California.  So while he lost, McCain showed that he can appeal across party lines, and remains in a good position for the contest in South Carolina.  In terms of money, however, Romney has $60 million to McCain's $31 million, a difference which could begin to be a real problem for McCain by February. 

There are also three footnotes to these Republican results. The first is the strange failure of Giuliani to put up any fight at all, as he dropped to just 3%. Perhaps if neither Romney nor McCain can win an advantage soon, this strategy will yet be vindicated, but it looks like a long shot. Only slightly better was Fred Thompson's 4% showing. He seems unable to ignite his campaign, and one suspects that he is staying in the race in order to have a shot at being the vice-presidential nominee. Indeed, perhaps that is Giuliani's idea as well. If he can show he is strong in Florida, he becomes an attractive VP who can deliver that vital swing state and help carry New York. Finally, there is Paul's fascinating maverick candidacy. He describes himself as an old-fashioned strict constructionist of the Constitution. He is so far to the right that he emerges on the left on some issues, notably Iraq, where he advocates withdrawal. If you have not seen him in the debates, pay more attention, for the Texas congressman has some vocal supporters, as he calls for balancing the budget, an end to military adventurism abroad, and a return to the foreign policy of Thomas Jefferson. I strongly doubt that he is seeking the vice-presidential nomination, and he is smart enough to know that he is but an articulate gadfly. If nothing else, he shows how boring Fred Thompson is by comparison.

Meanwhile, Hillary won, running unopposed, and will get zero delegates, because the Democratic Party is punishing Michigan for advancing its primary date, as discussed a few days ago here. A notable 43% did not support her in the absence of other candidates. The real action was out in Nevada, where delegates can be won or lost, and where a debate took place yesterday. It apparently was a particularly friendly affair, as the three main candidates made a point of not attacking one another. After some un-pleasantries earlier in the week over the relative contributions of Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson, it seems that Clinton and Obama have returned to their senses. Arguing about events that took place 40 years ago, and bringing up race, were just not going to sell either candidate to the electorate.

One final aspect of the Michigan vote needs to be emphasized. Fully 46% of those exit-polled admitted that they did not make up their minds until this week. Indeed, more than 30% made up their minds during the last three days. As in Iowa and New Hampshire, this remains a fickle electorate, one that can be swayed by small events or media images right up to the end. The last minute shifts on the whole favored Romney. McCain outpolled him (32% to 28%) among those who had decided more than one month ago, but Romney garnered 41% of the voters who decided on the last day, as they neared the ballot box. McCain only got a quarter of these votes, and that represents much of the margin of difference between them.